I spent some time last summer on Alaskan beaches.
Here are some photos that gave me pause:





This twin, or at least the engines that are left from it has been here a long time:


One general "rule" I question is the advise to land on the wet part of the beaches - sometimes I found those to be much softer than the upper, dry parts. And if you get stuck in the lower intertidal, you don't have nearly as much time to get unstuck as if you were in the upper part.
Also if there is a slough or creek paralleling the beach behind the storm berm, you can expect that the sand between it and the ocean will be soft.

Also, does anyone know what could this be:

Fucking killjoy....
But you make a good point

I've worked hard to own my plane and don't doubt I could land at some of these places, just can't accept the risk.
Or, just don't need to go there that bad

Hat's off to those that can accept the risk!

Great pictures, where were you. The first show a really common place to get stuck in soft sand, anywhere close to where a creek crosses tbe beach, you really want to stay at least a couple hundred feet from that area.

Your experience with wet vs dry sand mirrors mine exactly. The caveat, of course, is that you have appropriate size tires for playing on ocean beaches. At least on the Alaska Peninsula, the wetland could hide some nasty traps, like decaying giant kelp, and you could drop a tire out of sight. And, since the wet sand is closer to the water, even a minor loss of directional control may put you in the drink.

I was taught to nearly always land in the dry stuff, BUT different parts of the world have different conditions....so that may not apply to Washington or ? Beaches.

Aerial beach combing is a blast, and it needn't be all that hazardous.

MTV

That last photo might be (I am guessing) some sort of block and tackle housing for a ship's rope hoists???

patrol guy wrote:That last photo might be (I am guessing) some sort of block and tackle housing for a ship's rope hoists???

At first I thought it was some sort of a wave buoy, but a closer look inside reveals some sort of a core and a bunch of "cooling" fins surrounding it. It almost makes you think of a portable nuclear rector with the core surrounded by those cooling fins. So far noone has been able to identify this.
Here is another picture of the inside:

Regarding location of the beaches in the pics - I'm curious if any of the Alaska guys can id them.
Except for the twin props, all other spots are "easily" accessible (well, at least by Alaskans with airplanes standards)...

AKclimber wrote:I spent some time last summer on Alaskan beaches.
Here are some photos that gave me pause:





This twin, or at least the engines that are left from it has been here a long time:


One general "rule" I question is the advise to land on the wet part of the beaches - sometimes I found those to be much softer than the upper, dry parts. And if you get stuck in the lower intertidal, you don't have nearly as much time to get unstuck as if you were in the upper part.
Also if there is a slough or creek paralleling the beach behind the storm berm, you can expect that the sand between it and the ocean will be soft.

Also, does anyone know what could this be:

That first photo looks like Montague or Hinchenbrook??? Judging by the debris on the beach as well. Cook inlet doesnt have that kind of stuff on its beaches like the outside does....but it certainly can as well. My guess is on the outside of PWS??

AKT

aktahoe1 wrote:That first photo looks like Montague or Hinchenbrook??? Judging by the debris on the beach as well. Cook inlet doesnt have that kind of stuff on its beaches like the outside does....but it certainly can as well. My guess is on the outside of PWS??

AKT

You got it - Patton Bay on Montague.
The beach there actually wasn't that bad, except near the creek. But these beaches change so much - I've hiked some that were super soft one day and hard as rock a month later. Also I got stuck on one beach where I could walk on the sand without breaking through, but the wheels sunk 6" (8.50x10s). I couldn't have guessed there was soft sand under the crust.

Grreat photos. I was wondering what plane you had those 8.50X10's on. I'm thinking larger tires but don't think I have use for 29 or 31 inch bushwheels. I have a Tundra 2550 gross with 8.50X6 now.

dirtstrip wrote:Grreat photos. I was wondering what plane you had those 8.50X10's on. I'm thinking larger tires but don't think I have use for 29 or 31 inch bushwheels. I have a Tundra 2550 gross with 8.50X6 now.

It's a 170.
Sometimes 8.50x10s aren't big enough:

AKclimber wrote:

dirtstrip wrote:Grreat photos. I was wondering what plane you had those 8.50X10's on. I'm thinking larger tires but don't think I have use for 29 or 31 inch bushwheels. I have a Tundra 2550 gross with 8.50X6 now.

It's a 170.
Sometimes 8.50x10s aren't big enough:

Wow! I'm making a mental note. Never land where there is more than one side of water. Great
pictures.

Well I guess I will be the dissenting voice here (someone has to or it is just a boring agreement fest right?). Generally, the wet sand is the firmer sand, dry sand will get you stuck - of course you want to drag the beach and land in your tracks (there is a whole slew of training we do before we cut our new pilots loose on beaches). Don't land in between water or near creeks running to the ocean. But in the whole the sand that has most recently seen the water will be the firmest. I fly the beaches on both sides of the inlet, and the outer side of the kenai in the summer a lot (everyday usually multiple trips) in grossed out 206s with 8.5/10s, last summer was my sixth year, but free advice is worth what you pay.

Headoutdaplane wrote:Well I guess I will be the dissenting voice here (someone has to or it is just a boring agreement fest right?). Generally, the wet sand is the firmer sand, dry sand will get you stuck - of course you want to drag the beach and land in your tracks (there is a whole slew of training we do before we cut our new pilots loose on beaches). Don't land in between water or near creeks running to the ocean. But in the whole the sand that has most recently seen the water will be the firmest. I fly the beaches on both sides of the inlet, and the outer side of the kenai in the summer a lot (everyday usually multiple trips) in grossed out 206s with 8.5/10s, last summer was my sixth year, but free advice is worth what you pay.

Agreed for 99.99% of all situations I have been in.

AKclimber wrote:Sometimes 8.50x10s aren't big enough:

On the other hand lowering the step like that makes it easier to climb in.
The tail of a 170 must not be very heavy. That baby bush seems to be floating along quite well in the soft sand.

Thanks for the reply.

And, during the sockeye season in Bristol Bay, a number of operators land DC 3/4/6/7, C46, etc on the beaches out in that part of the world. You could probably land a 737 on those beaches.

Go out toward the end of the AK Peninsula and conditions can be a lot different. Big tires are pretty useful in that part of the world. You can land on the wet stuff much of the time, but with the dry, you just have to avoid obstacles....assuming good tires. Land in the wet and you might end up onTV with Larry Csonka....

MTV

dirtstrip wrote:

AKclimber wrote:Sometimes 8.50x10s aren't big enough:

On the other hand lowering the step like that makes it easier to climb in.
The tail of a 170 must not be very heavy. That baby bush seems to be floating along quite well in the soft sand.

Thanks for the reply.

I've seen the opposite with my set up. With 26'' bushwheels and baby bush the mains float on top in the soft sand and the tail digs in a lot more. You can see in this picture the track from my main gear wasn't deep at all, it just floated on top.

If you want more surface area, you need a setup like the Army tested on the Birddog:


Works, but you have to grease 6 times as many bearing every 100 hours. Less drag though.

Wonder how rough it would be going over big boxes like that at any speed compared to a 31" bw.

There was a tandem gear setup like that approved on the Cub. I've seen one set. Of those kinds of mods, I think the Cub "aerial landing system". Takes the cake....land on a wire suspended between two tall buildings.

MTV

That thing is a Kryptonite container, guard it well or superman will be in trouble